Object

Proposed Submission Core Strategy

Representation ID: 21092

Received: 09/11/2011

Respondent: Rye Town Council

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

The evidence base indicates that there is more locally derived need unmet in Rye than elsewhere in Rother. The Strategic Housing Market Assessment recommends 40% affordable housing in Rye and whilst being less profitable is still viable.

It is therefore disappointing that the provision of affordable housing within developments has been reduced from 40% to 30%.
The reduction in the allocation of affordable housing provision, combined with the reduction in housing allocation from 450 to 350, and the fact that there is a strong second home market in Rye ) means that local demand for homes will not be met.

Full text:

It is clear from the evidence base that there is more locally derived need unmet in Rye than elsewhere in Rother (S.2.37 Rye and Rye Harbour Study 2011). The Affordable Housing Background Paper 2011refers to the Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) 2010 that recommends 40% affordable housing in Rye. The Affordable Housing Viability Study (AVHS) was drafted in parallel to the SHMA in order to ensure that the conclusions could be used to inform both studies. This indicates that 40% while being less profitable is still viable.

It is therefore disappointing that the provision of new affordable housing within new developments in Rye has been reduced from the current 40% to 30%. The main reason given within paragraph 15.28 is to kick start regeneration. This appears to be a reaction to the current economic conditions whereas the Core Strategy covers a period of 17 years to 2028 which will see the economy over a number of economic cycles.

The reduction in the allocation of affordable housing provision, combined with the reduction in the housing allocation from 450 to 350, and the fact that there is a strong second home market in Rye (including new properties) means that local demand for homes will not be met.

Please also note typing error in the last paragraph on page 119 which refers to proposals for less than 15 houses in Bexhill and Rye and 10 in Battle. It should read 15 in Bexhill and 10 in Rye and Battle